The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum - View Single Post - Dueling Wizards Werewolf Suggestion Thread

littlemanpoet · 05-31-2006, 09:54 AM

I've finally hit upon the major solutions to the biggest problems with Dueling Wizards. It's really quite simple, really.

So I'm going to mod another one as soon as I can find the time. I'll go step in line on the Admin thread. Valier, are you okay with sub-modding for me?

#1: For the Good team to be able to PM twice as much as the Evil team seems unnecessary to me. Both can PM all Night long, and that will be sufficient.

#2: When EW & GW scry the same person, the EW will get a werewolf and the GW will know the player is a werewolf. 'Nuff said.

#3: I'm going to go with a normal Hunter. Here's why: with Night-time PMs, the GW, Seer, and Hunter together make a virtual "smart-bomb" for catching werewolves. There are 2 chances each Night for the good team to spot a werewolf; all that has to happen is for the GW to tell the Hunter who to pick, and SMACK one werewolf dead. .. on, and the hunter too, but a powerful effective way to go. The GW can make a new hunter the very next Night unless s/he scries a werewolf or the EW, which is even better anyway. 'Nuff said.

#4: The Hunter will be able to change his/her decision right up until 2 hours before the new Day starts. In fact, ALL Night-time decisions need to be made by 2 hours before the new Day starts. After that, it's time for the narration. 'Nuff said.

#5: tie resulting in no lynch: you guys are only seeing this from one angle. The Good team may not lynch a werewolf, but they also don't shoot themselves in the foot by lynching an innocent. The only problem they have is, that without a lynch and the voting record, there's even less to go on for making decisions. But I'm not sold on this one anyway, and won't use it unless there's a hue and cry in favor of it.

Regarding non-participating participants: I allowed for it. I allowed for a big village for non-participants because I wanted the effects of both to be felt in the game. I almost gave in, but didn't in the end. I wanted it to reflect real life such that not everybody is always on task or as committed as others. Let the village deal with it using the methods available to it. On this one I stand with Saucy: I don't want to skew the game. 'Nuff said.

05-31-2006, 09:54 AM	#33
littlemanpoet Itinerant Songster Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: The Edge of Faerie Posts: 7,066	I've finally hit upon the major solutions to the biggest problems with Dueling Wizards. It's really quite simple, really. So I'm going to mod another one as soon as I can find the time. I'll go step in line on the Admin thread. Valier, are you okay with sub-modding for me? #1: For the Good team to be able to PM twice as much as the Evil team seems unnecessary to me. Both can PM all Night long, and that will be sufficient. #2: When EW & GW scry the same person, the EW will get a werewolf and the GW will know the player is a werewolf. 'Nuff said. #3: I'm going to go with a normal Hunter. Here's why: with Night-time PMs, the GW, Seer, and Hunter together make a virtual "smart-bomb" for catching werewolves. There are 2 chances each Night for the good team to spot a werewolf; all that has to happen is for the GW to tell the Hunter who to pick, and SMACK one werewolf dead. .. on, and the hunter too, but a powerful effective way to go. The GW can make a new hunter the very next Night unless s/he scries a werewolf or the EW, which is even better anyway. 'Nuff said. #4: The Hunter will be able to change his/her decision right up until 2 hours before the new Day starts. In fact, ALL Night-time decisions need to be made by 2 hours before the new Day starts. After that, it's time for the narration. 'Nuff said. #5: tie resulting in no lynch: you guys are only seeing this from one angle. The Good team may not lynch a werewolf, but they also don't shoot themselves in the foot by lynching an innocent. The only problem they have is, that without a lynch and the voting record, there's even less to go on for making decisions. But I'm not sold on this one anyway, and won't use it unless there's a hue and cry in favor of it. Regarding non-participating participants: I allowed for it. I allowed for a big village for non-participants because I wanted the effects of both to be felt in the game. I almost gave in, but didn't in the end. I wanted it to reflect real life such that not everybody is always on task or as committed as others. Let the village deal with it using the methods available to it. On this one I stand with Saucy: I don't want to skew the game. 'Nuff said.